The Democrats thought they had a great distraction from the economic issues that bedevil most Americans in the form of 30-year-old activist Sandra Fluke. Rush Limbaugh foolishly (as he later acknowledged) called her a slut and a prostitute in the course of ridiculing, entirely properly, her very silly claim that the federal government should force all employers to pay for their female employees contraceptionI never did figure out whether the plan extended to buying male employees condoms and vasectomiesregardless of whether either the employers or employees prefer such benefits to cash compensation. Ms. Flukes theory, really, was so stupid as to be a ripe target for ridicule.

The Democrats went crazy in the aftermath of Rushs error, posturing themselves as the upholders of civility. Barack Obama got into the act, calling Ms. Fluke to congratulate her on her demand for free goods and services, and to ask how her delicate psyche was a holding up. Obama later explained that he did it for his daughters, Sasha and Malia, whom he would never want to hear coarse language.

Well. There was a basic problem with the Democrats strategy; namely, that pretty much everyone knows that when a Democrat talks about a Republican woman, slut or prostitute would be considered a compliment. So it was no surprise when conservatives pointed out that Bill Maher, who contributed $1 million to Obamas re-election campaign, has called Sarah Palin a c*** and a dumb t***, along with other, sometimes worse, epithets. When asked about Mahers disgusting attacks, Presidents Obamas press secretary explained that Obama is not a speech policeman. So evidently Sasha and Malia will have to hear some crude talk after allfrom Democrats, anyway.

Of course, Bill Maher is just one of many. Democrats, in general, are cruder and more vitriolic than Republicans. So it didnt take more than 24 hours or so for Greta van Susteren to point out that someone named Louis C.K.it is highly unlikely that you have heard of himwas scheduled to host the 68th Annual Radio & Television Congressional Correspondents Dinner on June 8. Those correspondents, of course, are some of the very people who had been excoriating Limbaugh for calling Ms. Fluke a slut. CNNs Jay McMichael headed the committee that was in charge of the program:

Were very excited about having Louis C.K. at the dinner, said Jay McMichael of CNN, who chairs the RTCAs executive committee. This is an evening youll want to experience. Were shaking things up, showcasing the unexpected, and delivering lots of laughs.

Lots of laughs, indeed: Mr. C.K., it turns out, is foul-mouthed even for a Democrat. Ms. van Susteren collected some of his comments about Sarah Palin. Feel free to skip ahead if you have a weak stomach or are easily offended:

Louis C.K. says of Palin: her f*** retard making c*** and the baby that just came out of her f**** disgusting c***.

To Palin: just stick your t** in its mouth and shut up.

And here is more:  her f***** retard making c****.

Need more to convince you? Here is what he says on twitter:

I want to rub my fathers c*** all over Sarah Palins fat t***

By the way, there is more, lots more.

That, however, is plenty. Even for a liberal, Mr. C.K. is disgusting.

So tonight Glenn Reynolds reported that the Congressional Correspondents (Democrats all, no doubt) have decided to forgo the pleasure of hearing Sarah Palins c*** and t*** ridiculed, along with her young sonhow funny is that!and have discreetly canceled Mr. C.K.s appearance.

This civility thing could be tough on the Democrats. What are they going to do for entertainment?

SNL just opened their show with a take on Rush Limbaugh calling Ms. Schmuck a slut. Then he went through a list of new sponsors which were supposedly not good sponsors and it was not funny at all. I am sure Hulu will have it up on their website by tomorrow.

It really does appear that Rush making this an issue is hurting the Rats more than it hurt him. We have found out that the slut is a full out Commie activist, put heat on Obummer for taking Maher’s donation after his Pius speech on decorum, has leftist water carriers like Kristen Powers turning against the Regime over this and this so called “comics comic” CK looking like a dirtbag and having to back out from performing for these dopes. All and all, this could be thought to be some well orchestrated plan by Rush it is turning out so well.

12
posted on 03/10/2012 8:44:28 PM PST
by Lazlo in PA
(Now living in a newly minted Red State.)

Rush does it again. If he would not have called Fluck a “slut,” what should have been a minor story turned into an attack to get Rush that backfired and shown the “light of truth” on the Democrats and their foul mouth friends. When are they going to learn you DON’T mess with Rush Limbaugh?

Agree with you, but the democrats mistake was doing this too far from the election....they are desperate with their little kangaroo court show....and the freepers that got pissed at Rush for apologizing and putting an end to this charade, all you fair weather friends, your not needed by Rush. blabber on. He got rid of some lefty sponsers that freepers were giving money to and got one that we can all use....light bulbs......GG

The dems started a fake battle thinking they were on offense when what they REALLY were was OFFENSIVE. RUSH gave a war...and everybody came. Then he sat back and watched them burn their playhouse down. Strategery. Rush is still the master.
WHO is catching all the hell now? little billy maher and oscambot. Fluke has been widely exposed for the fraud she is. pelosi looks like the nit-twit SHE is. The dems look petty and obscene. dem women look like...well, dem women. (And that ain’t pretty.) anita dunn has been exposed. And even gloria the red has crawled back out from under her rock.
Everyone now knows this was a dem planned fake setup with very little substance to it except the shrill faux outrage of it.
Rush’s leftist advertisers are losing their customers and their stocks are dipping.
I’d say Rush won the war. Big time. It was a calculated risk on his part, but calculated it was. Deliberate. And step by step, inch by inch, he beat their collective a$$.
Eventually, he will step up and explain it for those who still don’t get it.

But even more so, she is demanding money from complete strangers for sex. I don't know what world liberals live in, but to me that fits precisely into the definition of a prostitute. Who is the bigger whore: The streetwalker who walks up to one guy demanding $40 bucks for a BJ or Sandra Fluke demanding $3000 from millions?And this amount of money she demands indicates a massive amount of sex, thousands upon thousand of condoms which also fits in with calling her a slut.

The problem with Rush is he tells the truth, and liberals can't handle the truth. Show them a mirror and they scream in rage.

38
posted on 03/10/2012 11:15:52 PM PST
by GrandJediMasterYoda
(How ironic that Ann Coulter should write a book called Treason.)

The contraception attack did the damage it needed to to keep the candidate in the race that Obama really wants to face... Mitt Romney. This attack was squarely aimed at Rick Santorum to draw him out and eviscerate him.

40
posted on 03/10/2012 11:19:35 PM PST
by Thunder90
(Romney barely won in OH with a 12-1 money advantage, he can't beat Obama that way.)

I would recommend that everyone slip a condom into an envelope and mail it to the Dean of the Georgetown University Law School. Insert with the condom a note that requests its being forwarded to Ms Fluke and the “Finance Fluke’s *ucking Fund (4-F).”

Now I think we all agree that sex change operations should indeed be paid for by tax payers. However the problem I see arising is what if after a few months that person decides he or she doesn’t like their new sex and wants to change back.

Therefore I think we need to stipulate that tax payers will only pay for one sex change per year.

This woman was claiming to be spending $3000 a year on birth control if I read the thing properly. I dont really see how thats possible myself.

Let's assume it is true for a minute. Here are the implications of her statement:

(1) She doesn't know how to avail herself of all the 'free' services already out there that provide birth control at no or low cost;

(2) Fluke was really nothing more than a female activist hell bent on changing a Catholic Institution's policy, which she KNEW was in place BEFORE she chose to attend Georgetown;

(3) Fluke certainly "gets around";

(4) If I were some guy that "slept" with her while she was paying $3,000 for birth control, I'd be worried about my man-parts falling off about now. Really, how many guys did she sleep with anyway paying for all that birth control?!

Ms Fluke may venture into a bar and having imbibed a bit too much, she could then engage in unsafe sex and thus find herself punished with a baby. This would clearly be the government's fault and the only way to avoid this outcome would be to provide Ms Fluke with the free birth control of her choosing.

How does this translate to my need for contact lenses? Let me explain.

My husband of 16 years has had a vas and I do not need free birth control. However, I could venture into the same before mentioned bar. I could also imbibe a bit too much. I could even lose my Dolce and Gabbana prescription glasses and accidentally mistake a complete stranger for my own dear husband, have unprotected sex with him, and thus find myself also punished with a baby.

Clearly, the government should therefore also provide me with free corrective contact lenses. I prefer the daily disposables.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.